<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/28/2014 10:44 AM, Chandler
Carruth wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAGCO0KhMq5Z9=SZ79NWJAS4ohSPhMsJjnQHiY2gV01XUKHqLzg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Setting aside the reasonable concerns
over naming...</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:06 AM,
Dario Domizioli <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dario.domizioli@gmail.com" target="_blank">dario.domizioli@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Proposals
like this one have not received much attention in the
past, but we are still keen to work with the community on
this.</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
This doesn't seem accurate.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">When the optnone stuff was first
discussed, the use of a pragma *was* discussed, and there were
arguments against it because the semantics are highly
confusing: it only has effect on the function definitions
which are started after the pragma. This is confusing as you
might start the pragma *inside* a function definition. Such a
pragma might even have semantic impact by disabling
optimizations within the body of lambda, but *not* within any
surrounding expressions.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Personally, I find the semantics of
such a pragma extremely confusing. I would never advocate the
use of such a pragma, instead I would strongly advocate
*against* its use in literally all circumstances. It is hard
to support including it in Clang given that.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">On the flip side, we have a function
attribute which has a reasonable semantic model and addresses
the use case originally posited.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">So I don't think that this is something
which has been left unattended. I think it was attended, and
in the discussion that led to optnone, the approach was not
pursued and instead a different one was.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">-Chandler</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Chandler, while I actually agree with you in principal, I think
you're ignoring an important factor. The pragma approach is already
widely deployed. If we don't support pragma usage, there's no real
migration path for these applications. <br>
<br>
Adding support for this usage does not have to imply an endorsement
of the style. In fact, our documentation could explicitly suggest
migration to per-function attributes. (In my view, it should.)<br>
<br>
Philip<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>